I think I'm gonna start calling the @jk_rowling s and Glinners of the world as transpiracy theorists. Like, the common thing about the transgender conspiracy theorists is not being feminists, and certainly not radical, but a theory that is forming around 'trans activists'.

The transpiracy theory works like this:
- trans people exist, but are very, very rare
- instead they have been co-opted by 'trans activists' who are twisting things to nefarious ends
- there's no evidence to support this, but that's because They are keeping it hidden

There's a lexicon of in-words (Tavistock, cotton ceiling, ROGD) and a stable of go-to cranks (McHugh, Blanchard) that have only the most tenuous attachment to the medical establishment, and of course, their favorite villains (Yaniv) and inside definitions (queer theory).

It's all completely impenetrable from the outside, but the important thing is it has little relation to the actual state of trans healthcare or equal rights. It's embarrassingly common for theorists to warn us about catastrophic things if trans activists get their way...

only to be completely unaware that this is already how things work. Bathroom laws are perhaps the most common. Trans people have long used bathrooms in line with their identities because there was no law against it. And... nothing happened.

But, regardless, we're told that trans activists are trying to 'trans' (as a verb) kids, for... some reason. Force lesbians to have sex with them because, well, they're men and men are rapists (except transphobic men). It's all part of some plot to erase women's sex-based rights.

Why? Well, you know. Reasons. Who is behind this? Well, Magdalene Burns, quoted favorably by Rowling in her essay on her site suggested that (((Soros))) was behind it. Sometimes it's Big Pharma, who are making a killing off of generic hormones, apparently.

It's all deeply Q shit, frankly and it becomes incredibly difficult to unravel and explain why, yes, it actually is unhinged that their version of queer theory is problematic because it has no relation to actual theory and they think that college students are being groomed.

How do I explain to normies that Paul McHugh, who ran the Johns Hopkins trans program isn't actually to be trusted because that was in the fucking 1970s and considered it a mental health failure if trans women were not solely into men?

It has so little relation to reality that people will read it and go, "Well, that sounds like she has reasonable concerns" and not realize that ACTUALLY Rowling and Glinner lionizing someone who thought transgender people are a Jewish conspiracy is bonkers.

I don't think 'transpiracy theorists' will catch on, because TERF is too pithy, but I do really think it is helpful to frame this as a conspiracy theory because that's ultimately what it is.